The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.

From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."

Monday, June 24, 2013

The Swelling Storm over the Nile

by Zalman Shoval

The armed clashes
taking place across the Middle East could soon include Egypt and
Ethiopia. Continual attempts to allay the differences diplomatically are
being made, but the clouds of war have yet to dissipate.

The crisis is over
water. The Nile River is Egypt's life artery, and Ethiopia is
threatening to block it. The Nile's origins, as we know, are in eastern
Africa, and before the giant river reaches Egypt's parched agricultural
fields it passes through other countries, including Ethiopia, which also
has vast areas with untapped agricultural potential in need of water.
Ethiopia, like Egypt, has a population of some 90 million people.

This is not only about
agriculture, but also about independence from foreign energy providers
-- a challenge that, if solved, could move Ethiopia from a failed
economy to a functioning one, perhaps even to a regional powerhouse. It
would be perfect if not for that one small problem.

Ethiopia is building a
large hydroelectric dam on the Nile, at a cost of nearly $5 billion, to
store most of the water in its territory. Doing this could, in very
short order, sentence Egypt to unprecedented famine and regular power
outages. Despite Ethiopian assurances that it will take Egypt's needs
into account, this growing issue is creating an impossible situation for
Cairo, which already has enough difficulties providing for the
country's 84 million residents.

The contradictory
interests of two countries traversed by one river are a central issue in
international law. Even Israel, in the past, has needed to make tough
decisions, including military ones (until the Golan Heights were
captured in 1967), over Syrian attempts to divert the Jordan River.

The conflict over the
Nile is also not new. In 1929, the British, who ruled over most of the
area at the time, sponsored a deal that designated how the river's water
would be allocated. Because of Britain's special interest in Egypt,
Cairo was given access to 60 percent of the water as well as veto power
over any project involving the Nile by upstream countries. It is this
situation that other countries in the region, which sit along the
riverbed, are now seeking to change by signing a treaty that will
significantly reduce Egypt's water supply.

In the latest
development, the Ethiopian parliament unanimously endorsed the new Nile
River Cooperative Framework Agreement, an accord already signed by five
other Nile-basin countries -- Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda, Kenya and
Burundi -- making it Ethiopian law. The Egyptian reaction, as expected,
was outrage. President Mohammed Morsi declared that even though he did
not want war, "all the options are open."

Meanwhile, retired
senior Egyptian army officer Gen. Talaat Musallam said, "Even though
Cairo's ability to cast influence is at an all-time low, if a diplomatic
solution is not found the military commanders in Egypt could decide
that it is better to die in battle than to die of thirst."

The plot for Verdi's
"Aida" deals with war between Egypt and Ethiopia, from which the
Egyptians emerge victorious. Even now, Egypt's military power is
apparently greater. But the Ethiopians are tough and brave fighters, and
we should not forget that in the two wars they fought against Italy,
they won the first and were barely defeated in the second, and then only
after Italy employed the use of gas.

Ethiopia, however, is
not eager for war either, but it could be that it feels that the current
crises battering Egypt are rendering its military threats empty, and
that Cairo will have no choice but to accept the new distribution of the
Nile's water. Perhaps they are correct, perhaps not.

There is another matter
to consider as well: If the Ethiopian initiative takes off, it will
cause geopolitical aftershocks in the entire region that will shift the
center of power from Egypt to Ethiopia, which will also have diplomatic
consequences. The United States, which is in no need of more problems in
the Middle East, will do its best to convince Egypt (its ally in
principle) and Ethiopia (its ally in practice), to solve the problem
peacefully. With that, Washington's diplomatic clout is diminished since
the "Arab spring" revolution in Egypt, such that it is not clear its
efforts will bear fruit.

Israel also finds itself in a
dilemma: The agreements and ties with Egypt are the foundation of its
diplomatic and security policy, but its growing and strengthening ties
with Ethiopia are also an important part of its considerations. Until
now Israel has refrained from any sort of involvement in the swelling
storm, and we should hope this continues to be the case.